Re: Allow digits in identifiers (issue 6493072)

[Keith OHara]

On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 00:50:27 -0700, <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 2012/09/05 06:59:16, Keith wrote:
> > It costs a lot of programmer time to make the extra rules to save that
> > 0.2%,
>
> Not really.
But, but...  flex documentation is pretty clear about [getting rid of] backing 
up being very expensive :
"Getting rid of backing up is messy and often may be an enormous amount of work for 
a complicated scanner."

Okay.  Maybe it didn't take you long to /maintain/ backup-free rules, but it 
took me quite a while to remove backing up on the existing rules, when I made 
the patch to clean up warnings.

> I am not convinced that patterns requiring arbitrary amounts of backing
> up make for a good choice of lexical units.
Right. They probably don't.

> So I am against removing this advice independently from patches that
> might actually require this removal.
Agreed,
but I'll still pout a couple more times that you get your Schemy-dashes and 
underscores but I still have to refer to the motif from measure 
tousend_sechshundert_siebzig

> http://codereview.appspot.com/6493072/